Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Voyagerfan5761/UBX/friends with


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was no consensus. There are valid and interesting arguments for and against the existence of this box. It is right and proper to be concerned that editors (newer ones, especially) might be given false impressions of Wikipedia's nature by a social userbox; it is at least as important to guard against the unnecessary stifling of the free exchange of ideas among WP's volunteer community. Policy would compel the deletion of this box if there were substantial evidence that it was being used in a manner that promoted "socialization" above content writing: as has been pointed out, though, despite a legitimate worry that this might happen, there is little evidence that it has. The default state is thus to maintain the box, subject to the provision that should it ever become clearly disruptive, it will be nominated for deletion again. Xoloz (talk) 15:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Voyagerfan5761/UBX/friends with
This was originally nominated for deletion at Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_December_28 but was userfied in the middle of the discussion. This should be deleted per the arguments there which most focus on WP:NOT. Metros (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree that, while it is a well intentioned template, it will probably cause problems. Wikipedia isn't a social networking site and if someone puts this on their own userpage without the permission of the "friend" it could lead to conflict. Leave "friends lists" on myspace, facebook and what-not. I don't see how this template will help the encyclopedia, even when userfied. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 13:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * if someone puts this on their own userpage without the permission of the "friend" it could lead to conflict - have you seen any evidence of this happening?
 * I don't see how this template will help the encyclopedia, even when userfied - but deleting it may harm the encyclopedia by, potentially, alienating some contributors and making them less likely to contribute. In contrast, leaving it where it is does no harm whatsoever to the encyclopedia, as we don't need to worry about server space. WaltonOne 20:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No I haven't seen any occurances of the template being used without consent of both parties, but I have seen divisive behaviour. A "friend request" was received by this user but turned down (link), but in the section above "friend requests" were sent and accepted by other users. Also the template distracts from encyclopedic contributions, see Special:Contributions/Nillanilla3ee. Of the 175 edits 81 to the userspace, 31 to usertalk and 20 to the Wikipediholic test. It seems that this user (who has this ubx on his/her page) is using WP as a networking site. Now I'm not saying the box promotes this, but it facilitates it. I am not worried about performance, or how much storage is available on the servers, it's just that the box is distracting from the aim of Wikipedia, to provide a free encyclopedia, not to provide myspace. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 05:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked at the thread you cited - if you look at IXella's reply on Nillanilla's talk page, it appears that they are siblings (or at least know each other in real life), so I wouldn't read too much into the refusal. With regard to that user's contributions, I agree that he seems to be using Wikipedia principally as a social networking site, but it's also evident (from looking at both talk pages et al.) that he is very young. He needs gentle encouragement in the right direction, not a coercive approach. I don't see how deleting this box would in any way induce him to work more on the encyclopedia. WaltonOne 12:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I briefly looked at the contributions of the first 25 userpages listed in Special:Whatlinkshere/User:Voyagerfan5761/UBX/friends with. 6 out of the 25 had contributions concentrated in the userspace, that's almost a quarter (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). If that concentration is present throughout the entire list of users with the box, then 44 users of this box have contributions skewed away from Wikipedia's purpose. Will deleting this box prevent people using Wikipedia as a networking site? No, but having boxes like this make it appear to newbies that Wikipedia is for social networking. In response to the essay Why do you care?, I don't care. I won't be following this up if it isn't deleted as I don't see it as a serious problem, but I don't think the box provides a net benefit to Wikipedia hence my firm opposition to it's existence. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 04:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I understand what you're saying, and you raise a very valid point. But 6 out of 25 is not actually that large a proportion; furthermore, even those users whose contributions are concentrated in userspace can be encouraged to make more beneficial contributions. In response to your other point, no, the box doesn't provide a net benefit to Wikipedia - but deleting it may cause net harm to Wikipedia, as the potential benefit (creating a less social-networking-type atmosphere) is outweighed by the potential harm (alienating users and driving them away). While this may seem counter-intuitive, I maintain that we don't need to delete userspace content just because it isn't a net benefit; as we don't need to free up server space (and deletions don't do so anyway), we have no need to delete any userspace content unless it's actively causing harm to Wikipedia. WaltonOne 09:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep used on hundreds of user pages, not divisive or against the project in any way. -Nard 15:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is used on 175 userpages, also how is that a reason to keep? James086 Talk &#124;  Email 05:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Because many of those 175 users are good contributors, not "social networkers". WaltonOne 12:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. As above, I can see myriad problems with this template and the 'friendship' idea. >< Richard  Ω6  12  15:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Well, obviously I'd vote to keep the page; it is in my userspace, after all. :D But the original debate was closed as a speedy delete per both G6 and WP:UBM, the latter of which advocates doing exactly what I have done, which is userfy a controversial userbox. I see no reason why two or three boxes on someone's userpage, especially if transcluded from userspace, should be a problem. As long as nobody tries to get as many of these as possible (as is done on Facebook, for instance, to appear the "most popular" by having dozens of friends), what's wrong with advertising a few good friends who also happen to have Wikipedia user accounts? Tuvok[T@lk/Improve] 18:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per my longstanding reasoning in the essay Editors matter, as well as Why do you care?, an excellent essay which makes much the same point. Since this template is in userspace, the onus is on the nominator to show that deleting it will be a net benefit to the encyclopedia; this has not been satisfactorily demonstrated. As we don't need to worry about server capacity, and deletion of material doesn't free up space anyway (since deleted material stays in the archives), there is no possibility of any direct benefit arising from deleting the page; furthermore, such a deletion runs the risk of potentially reducing Wikipedia's sense of community and thereby making contributors less happy and less productive. To address the alternative line of argument made by James, it is true that there is a possibility that the userbox could create conflict if improperly used, but there is no evidence of this happening; I see nothing here other than an innocuous, friendly userbox that some people use to make Wikipedia a happier place. I recommend that some WP:SENSE be applied in considering this deletion. WaltonOne 20:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. With regard to deletion reducing Wikipedia's sense of community, I fail to see how deletion of a template will drive people away. Why would they be driven away? People don't need a friend template to be friends with someone, and if they do feel the need to express their friendship, they can just say so on their userpage. >< Richard  Ω6  12  20:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Aggressive deletions of userspace material tend to drive contributors away. It's happened time and time again. IMO it's much better to let people express themselves in their userspace however they wish, providing there isn't a supervening reason to delete it (i.e. it's disruptive or inflammatory in some way). Like I said, the onus here is on those who advocate deletion to show that the page's existence is harming the encyclopedia, or that deleting the page would benefit the encyclopedia. I see no evidence of either. WaltonOne 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Although it may not be harming the encyclopedia at the moment, it also has no use. As I mentioned above, people can display their friendship without a userbox. Also, if use of this becomes widespread, we could end up with a myspace-esque situation whereby users start saying 'I've got x more friends than you' or 'Add me as a friend on Wikipedia!' and things will slowly descend into lunacy. >< Richard  Ω6  12  21:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I really don't understand this popular fixation with avoiding "social networking" on Wikipedia. I think the essay Why do you care? sums it up nicely. If people are contributing to the encyclopedia, and are not disrupting the work of others, then what does it matter what they do in their own userspace? Many people seem to think that allowing anything vaguely social or frivolous is going to cause Wikipedia to descend into anarchy and chaos, but I see no evidence for this proposition. WaltonOne 21:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not trying to 'tear down anything non-encyclopedic', I am merely saying that this may cause some editors to abandon article-editing and use Wikipedia solely for social networking. That is harming the project. Also, the over-proliferation of 'friend boxes' may drive editors away itself, as they may get stressed worrying about how many friends they have, who is their friend, etc. and leave Wikipedia for that reason.>< Richard  Ω6  12  22:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Will it solve anything if I add a ParserFunctions check to make sure the template is only being used in my own userspace? That would certainly keep other users from social-networking with my template. Not that someone else couldn't copy it and use it themselves. (To forestall the argument, others could recreate something similar from scratch even if this version is deleted.) Besides, anyone who would abandon editing to use Wikipedia as a social network probably wasn't too serious about contributing to the encyclopedia anyway. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve] 23:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am a strong advocate of preventing WP from becoming any type of social network, yet I am a strong advocate of userpage leniency (editors matter). But I think userboxes can be divisive. This userbox can encourage cliques and alliances (hints of the "secret" email episode), and most likely would be used by grade-schoolers (IMO) who already have enough trouble with stalkers on Myspace (or it would be used by editors who do not really contribute to mainspace, this is just my opinion - no examples to provide - but if I have time I might check this out), but it is a userpage. It is a tough one, but I am going to have to opine that it causes slightly more harm than good and pull the DELETE lever.-- 12 N oo n 2¢ 22:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I honestly don't see any good reason why this template should be deleted. Deleting it would probably upset the editors that have on their userpage, many of which are good contributors. So we have little-to-nothing to gain from the deletion, while we potentially create wikidrama if we do it. So this aint really a hard decision for me here. Charon X /talk 20:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep If editors start to use their pages for socializing instead of contributing, we'll deal with it the same way we do right now. Vague predictions of gloom and doom and a bunch of biased assumptions are hardly a valid reason to delete something. - Koweja (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see any evidence of this userbox causing Wikipedia to be used as a Social Network. It's all a prediction of what could happen, as in Durova's case. -- Chetblong TalkSign 03:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak delete 12Noon has expressed what i would say also. Though usesr can express their individuality, checking, it seems that this is in fact used for facebook-stye networking in most cases. check some for yourself from what links here for the template. . I dont want to embarrass people with the links DGG (talk) 03:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I tried what DGG suggested and looked at random user pages from whatlinkshere. I guess it's the nature of small sampling, but the users I looked at all happened to have made contributions to the encyclopedia itself.  As such I agree that this isn't causing Wikipedia to be used as a social network, but does seem to be enjoyed by people who are here to build an encyclopedia.  That the box theoretically could be used divisively isn't convincing to me.  If that actually comes to pass I'd have no prejudice against reconsideration. --JayHenry (talk) 07:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.